LOL...Colts fan bailing

[NFL_Truth]

Using the naked eye is definitely no different you dumbass especially when said coach can write down word for word what the other coach said and use it later. And no, you're right. We're the only team at the time that got caught taping (Broncos later were suspected but nobody cared because of who they are) but other organizations have used shady methods as well. As far as I can remember the Steelers of the 70's were juiced up. Oh, but that doesn't matter because they weren't illegal back then. Yeah right. We all know what 'roids are capable of now. If I'm not mistaken there were a lot of rumors that the 49ers of the 80's were cheating the salary cap and the Broncos of the 90's did just that. If you ask me, these are all much worse than signal taping.

And the fact that you actually think Brady is such a good quarterback because he knows the defensive alignment is just ridiculous and shows you have ZERO football knowledge. Even if a QB knew the alignments, he would still have to make the throws with NFL calibur accuracy. In case you haven't notice, Brady can make it rain on gameday.

Tell me, what the hell is the point of signing up at a Pats messageboard just to report Spygate facts that are last years news? Are you that much of a fatass loser that you're completely incapable of actually going out in the sunlight and making some friends? Eh, I shouldn't make fun of you though. Do what makes you happy. Apparently, that's being a troll on a messageboard for a team you clearly do not like and rubbing chicken grease on your tits.

Using a tape is much more an advantage then a nacked eye because you can view it again and again. So yes there was alot o thins learned in those 6 years they cheated.

The reason not a single other team has been caught is simply because other teams have not been cheating like NE has. I've read about the Broncos using binoculars to view coaches which is certainly wrong, it is with the naked eye which is better then what NE did but using binoculars is an unfair advantage. Yes other teams have cheated and that is certainly wrong as well, its just that no team has cheated like NE has, or to the extreme extent. Thereore no team had gained as much of an advantage. Any team who has cheated the salary cap is dead wrong as well, is it as bad as spygate? No, but it is very wrong none the less. As far as the Steelers of the 70's, there is no proof of them taking steriods, if they did it was before it became illegal. Is that unfair? You betcha, but not breaking the rules.

I certainly know a great deal about football and my pointing out NE's unfair advantages from cheating does not make me less educated, it makes me a more educated football fan. But this discussion should not be about attacking other members, it should be about discussing football. That is what i'm here to do.

 

[JaxPats]

Using a tape is much more an advantage then a nacked eye because you can view it again and again. So yes there was alot o thins learned in those 6 years they cheated.

The reason not a single other team has been caught is simply because other teams have not been cheating like NE has. I've read about the Broncos using binoculars to view coaches which is certainly wrong, it is with the naked eye which is better then what NE did but using binoculars is an unfair advantage. Yes other teams have cheated and that is certainly wrong as well, its just that no team has cheated like NE has, or to the extreme extent. Thereore no team had gained as much of an advantage. Any team who has cheated the salary cap is dead wrong as well, is it as bad as spygate? No, but it is very wrong none the less. As far as the Steelers of the 70's, there is no proof of them taking steriods, if they did it was before it became illegal. Is that unfair? You betcha, but not breaking the rules.

I certainly know a great deal about football and my pointing out NE's unfair advantages from cheating does not make me less educated, it makes me a more educated football fan. But this discussion should not be about attacking other members, it should be about discussing football. That is what i'm here to do.

No, you're here to keep drubbing up what has ended and overwith. You're nothing but a narcisistic troll whom nobody give a rats azzz what YOU think. As I said before, SKEE_ROO:banned2::ban?::spygate::deadhorse::violent:

 

[NFL_Truth]

No, you're here to keep drubbing up what has ended and overwith. You're nothing but a narcisistic troll whom nobody give a rats azzz what YOU think. As I said before, SKEE_ROO:banned2::ban?::spygate::deadhorse::violent:

I'm here to discuss football, as i've said. It just so happens that some of my views aggrivate patriots fans who do not want to hear and re-live illegal activity that their teams was convicted of. So what I have done is started another topic in which any member has the oppertunity to respectfully call me out on any of the things that i've said that you might feel are not correct. There is no reason for personal attacks or aggrivation, its football plain and simple. And as i said, im here to talk about it in respectfull fashion, regardless of what views we as members might have.

 

[Double G]

"But its not according to me that the Patriots cheated in the 2003 & 2004 post season, according to Bill Belichick the videotaping policy had been running since he had become head coach in 2000."

Since 2000? Then why did they finish 5-11 that year and why did they start out the 2001 season 5-5?

If you are going to make a point, try to have some facts to back it up.

If they cheated and had such a huge advantage, why did they not go 16-0 from 2000 through 2007, win every game 49-0 and win every Super Bowl?

Notice how they went 16-0 AFTER they got caught?

Man are you dense.

Somewhere out there, a village is missing its idiot.

 

[Jetssuck]

I certainly know a great deal about football.[/QUOTE]

The filming memo didn't come out until the beginning of the 2006 season. That was after the Patriots won their superbowls. So we have no tainted superbowls, moron.

 

[Jetssuck]

Why did the Patriots do so well after being caught?
This was because players such as Brady had aquired a great deal of knowledge from 6 years of signal stealing, thus becoming a more knowledgable QB and better at playing. Same for the coaches and other players, the knowledge aquired thru illegal means seasoned minds and a memorization and knowledge of the game amplified thru the material they intercepted.

Is that why Peyton's having such a tough season? Now that there is no defensive signals for Howard Mudd to steal and relay to him.

 

[NFL_Truth]

"But its not according to me that the Patriots cheated in the 2003 & 2004 post season, according to Bill Belichick the videotaping policy had been running since he had become head coach in 2000."

Since 2000? Then why did they finish 5-11 that year and why did they start out the 2001 season 5-5?

If you are going to make a point, try to have some facts to back it up.

If they cheated and had such a huge advantage, why did they not go 16-0 from 2000 through 2007, win every game 49-0 and win every Super Bowl?

Notice how they went 16-0 AFTER they got caught?

Man are you dense.

Somewhere out there, a village is missing its idiot.

Why did you go 6-10? Because even with videotaping you were not a very good team. It gives you a major advantage but not enough to go 16-0 and win every game 49-0. No, but it is enough of an advantage to make an average team an elite.

I've answered this many times but the reason the Pats went 18-1 was a combination of already established aquired talent such as Moss & Thomas, combined with knowledged minds aided by cheating for all those years. They also won a game they technically lost to Baltimore, and played in the weakest division the NFL has seen in years. That is why they went 18-1 last year.

And in response to the memo released in 2006, the rule has been the same for years, but the memo was prompted from rumors of the pats pushing the envelope with the videotaping, having their tape taken away before they began filming against GB, etc. So yes there were knowlingly cheating for prior super Bowl years, the memo was a reminder, not a new rule.

And yes they have been cheating since 2000, Roger Goodell confirmed this is what Bill Belichick had told him, and Matt Walsh's tapes even being from SB years had done nothing but confirm what Belichick admited. So yes, even since 2000.

 

[JaxPats]

And yes they have been cheating since 2000, Roger Goodell confirmed this is what Bill Belichick had told him, and Matt Walsh's tapes even being from SB years had done nothing but confirm what Belichick admited. So yes, even since 2000.

LMAO! Matt Walsh? Is this you? Really now, come on, you can say it. geez, you're such a MOE-RON

 

[NFL_Truth]

And yes they have been cheating since 2000, Roger Goodell confirmed this is what Bill Belichick had told him, and Matt Walsh's tapes even being from SB years had done nothing but confirm what Belichick admited. So yes, even since 2000.

LMAO! Matt Walsh? Is this you? Really now, come on, you can say it. geez, you're such a MOE-RON

No, not Matt Walsh.

 

[Jetssuck]

And in response to the memo released in 2006, the rule has been the same for years, but the memo was prompted from rumors of the pats pushing the envelope with the videotaping, having their tape taken away before they began filming against GB, etc. So yes there were knowlingly cheating for prior super Bowl years, the memo was a reminder, not a new rule./QUOTE]

The rule hasn't been the same for years. The memo was prompted by a change in the league to no longer tolerate what they formerly tolerated. And what is tolerated is legal. The same thing they did when they issued the memo to enforce a different pass interference call.

Why do you need a reminder when you have a rule book? Why not just issue a reminder to read the rule book.

 

[NFL_Truth]

And in response to the memo released in 2006, the rule has been the same for years, but the memo was prompted from rumors of the pats pushing the envelope with the videotaping, having their tape taken away before they began filming against GB, etc. So yes there were knowlingly cheating for prior super Bowl years, the memo was a reminder, not a new rule./QUOTE]

The rule hasn't been the same for years. The memo was prompted by a change in the league to no longer tolerate what they formerly tolerated. And what is tolerated is legal. The same thing they did when they issued the memo to enforce a different pass interference call.

Why do you need a reminder when you have a rule book? Why not just issue a reminder to read the rule book.

The NFL has never allowed one team to videotape another teams sidelines. This rule has not changed. The memo was sent out in 2006 because rumors had spread that the patriots had been doing it. Although the NFL did not know for sure, or at least i imagine they didnt, they certainly would not want the face of the league exposed. This was clear in seeing how quick it was swept under neath the rug when they did get caught. So, the nfl sent a direct memo in the hopes that the patriots would stop, never get caught, and not tarnish the leagues reputation.

The reason they didnt send a memo telling them to read the rule book is because the memo was specified for this one issue that was being a problem. If they told them just to read the rule book, teams would not know what to look for, it wouldnt be a specific enough warning.

But videotaping an opponents sideline has never been legal, and no one could ever think it would be okay, or that the nfl would allow it. Pass interf. is up to a referee to judge an extent of which on-field play is acceptable. Videotaping an other teams sidelines is an NFL rule that has never had acceptance, it just so happens the Patriots were the one and only team to do it, then get caught.

 

[Jetssuck]

The NFL has never allowed one team to videotape another teams sidelines. This rule has not changed. The memo was sent out in 2006 because rumors had spread that the patriots had been doing it. Although the NFL did not know for sure, or at least i imagine they didnt, they certainly would not want the face of the league exposed. This was clear in seeing how quick it was swept under neath the rug when they did get caught. So, the nfl sent a direct memo in the hopes that the patriots would stop, never get caught, and not tarnish the leagues reputation.

The reason they didnt send a memo telling them to read the rule book is because the memo was specified for this one issue that was being a problem. If they told them just to read the rule book, teams would not know what to look for, it wouldnt be a specific enough warning.

But videotaping an opponents sideline has never been legal, and no one could ever think it would be okay, or that the nfl would allow it. Pass interf. is up to a referee to judge an extent of which on-field play is acceptable. Videotaping an other teams sidelines is an NFL rule that has never had acceptance, it just so happens the Patriots were the one and only team to do it, then get caught.

It has been going on for years by other teams, you clueless moron. Find Jimmie Johnson's quote about this very matter. Your own witness Matt Walsh even mentioned other teams besides the Patriots doing this. Swept under the rug is right? But not the rug you're thinking of.

A rule is a rule is a rule. Whether it's pass interference or videotapping. The league tolerated videotapping and then decided they weren't going to tolerate videotapping. They tolerated interference beyond five yards and then decided they weren't going to tolerate it beyond five yards. Nothing tainted about playing by the rules that apply, not rules that may apply in the future.

 

[Kontradiction]

As far as the Steelers of the 70's, there is no proof of them taking steriods, if they did it was before it became illegal. Is that unfair? You betcha, but not breaking the rules.

So you've spent your entire time here whining and complaining of cheating yet when I bring up the fact that the Steelers were (and it's been proven so don't try to sweep it under the rug) roided up and were cheating themselves, you go on to say that it's not cheating because they didn't break the rules? How does that possibly make sense? Dude, you really should look into taking a debate class or two. You're not very good at being an apologist for the rest of the NFL at all.

But this discussion should not be about attacking other members, it should be about discussing football. That is what i'm here to do.

Go cry about it then. You opened yourself up to attacks the minute you joined here and started posting about nothing other than Spygate. You SMACK of being a Colts/Jets/Steelers/Chargers/Bills/Dolphins fan whose pure jealousy drives him to a Pats forum to discuss, at length, something that is very, very old news and is also very blown out of proportion.

 

[Jetssuck]

"NFL Truth" kinda reminds me of that Bills fan who used to post here. The one that was obsessed with spygate and claimed to be a graduate of Harvard.

 

[Kontradiction]

NFL_Truth, is this you?

Unofficial Indianapolis Colts Fan Forums - View Profile: NFLFan23

San Francisco 49ers, huh? Now I know why you want to come to this forum as much as you do.

 

[JAYHAWKS34]

NFL_Truth, is this you?

Unofficial Indianapolis Colts Fan Forums - View Profile: NFLFan23

San Francisco 49ers, huh? Now I know why you want to come to this forum as much as you do.

lol that's gotta be him, good work

 

[NFL_Truth]

It has been going on for years by other teams, you clueless moron. Find Jimmie Johnson's quote about this very matter. Your own witness Matt Walsh even mentioned other teams besides the Patriots doing this. Swept under the rug is right? But not the rug you're thinking of.

A rule is a rule is a rule. Whether it's pass interference or videotapping. The league tolerated videotapping and then decided they weren't going to tolerate videotapping. They tolerated interference beyond five yards and then decided they weren't going to tolerate it beyond five yards. Nothing tainted about playing by the rules that apply, not rules that may apply in the future.

If Jimmie Johnson and the Cowboys cheated in the 1990's that wouldnt surprise me and yes they should be punished. Matt Walsh would certainly claim others do it, why go out of his way to mnake himself look like the only one?

Spying is certainly different then an on-filed rule. The NFL never tolerated spying, the Patriots have been the only team to do it and were caught. I the NFL knew of anyone else doing it and had proof, they would have done the same thing to them that they did to the Pats, facts are there is no proof of any other team doing this besides the Patriots.

As far as the Steelers, what is the proof they have? Where are the lab tests and confessions? But if they did do it, it is wrong but not technically cheating. The Patriots knowingly broke a big rule, the Steelers might (waiting for proof on that one) have taken an unfair advantage but did not break a rule. Both are wrong. But the Pats are the only team caught, and the team of the two that broke the rules.

 

[Jetssuck]

If Jimmie Johnson and the Cowboys cheated in the 1990's that wouldnt surprise me and yes they should be punished. Matt Walsh would certainly claim others do it, why go out of his way to mnake himself look like the only one?

Spying is certainly different then an on-filed rule. The NFL never tolerated spying, the Patriots have been the only team to do it and were caught. I the NFL knew of anyone else doing it and had proof, they would have done the same thing to them that they did to the Pats, facts are there is no proof of any other team doing this besides the Patriots.

As far as the Steelers, what is the proof they have? Where are the lab tests and confessions? But if they did do it, it is wrong but not technically cheating. The Patriots knowingly broke a big rule, the Steelers might (waiting for proof on that one) have taken an unfair advantage but did not break a rule. Both are wrong. But the Pats are the only team caught, and the team of the two that broke the rules.

Once again you're showing your stupidity. Jimmie Johnson admits to doing the same thing, but that still doesn't convince you that other teams beside the Patriots have ever filmed signals.

I'm sure you watch alot of tv and that makes you an expert on the history of filming of signals. But another expert, Steve Sabol, disagrees. Sabol has said that filming signals has been going on for a long time in football.

Prove that the anti-spying rule is different from any other rule. It's the rule the Patriots broke, so fans, like you, that are jealous of the Patriots success have tried to convince themselves it's a big rule.

And to repeat, the anti-filming memo came out in 2006. Beginning in 2006 the league was no longer going to tolerate what it has been tolerating forever. If it were such a big rule that had never been knowingly allowed, no memo/warning would have been necessary. All the commissioner would have had to have done was start investigating the Patriots the minute he heard an accusation.

 

[DaBruinz]

I respectfully disagree. The 2006 AFC championship was played well by both teams. By no means was the game handed to them, they took it. It was the greatest comeback in championship game history. On top of that, this was the last game the Pats got to know the other teams signals in. It wasn't surprising that as soon as Manning started calling plays at the line, they suddenly couldn't stop him. It was an awesome game played by both teams.

You are clearly attempting to re-write the facts here chum. The AFCCG was, MOST CERTAINLY, handed to the Colts. How else can you explain Kelvin Hayden getting away with raping Caldwell in the endzone and no call. And the BS call on Hobbs for breathing on Reggie Wayne.

And please, don't be an idiot about the signals. The Pats weren't taping signals to be used during games. But far be it from you to know what you are talking about.

 

[DaBruinz]

The reason getting it from a videotape made a difference because "if" someone were to view them from the stands and pass the messege along, that is not as direct or helpfull as seeing it for yourself.

What he "gleaned" from those tapes is an excessive amount of experience gathered in a short period of time. I'm not saying the Jets signals in 2006 are the same as today or anything like that. But Brady and company gathered more information then any other team in regards to plays, signals, etc. Basically they were in the heads of the other team and did so thru illegal means.

What advantage did Brady get? Its essentially the same thing as an experienced Vetern would get. Someone like a Favre or a Testeverde gathered so much knowledge after playing so long, Brady learned things in a shorter period of time then those guys did because he didnt have to decipher things like other QB's did, he simply recieved them.

These are the advantages of which i speak.

The problem with your BS is that the Pats didn't tape every game. Also, moron, the tapes weren't viewed during the games. Not to mention that there have been multiple coaching changes on teams like Miami since Brady got in. Also, lets not forget that teams change their signals DURING the game. And since the tapes couldn't be viewed during the games, there is no way it would have helped.